The Eastern Power Distribution Company of A.P. Ltd., Vs The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner / Recovery Officer — Andhra Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

The Eastern Power Distribution Company of A.P. Ltd., Vs The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner / Recovery Officer — Andhra Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; the writ petition was dismissed following the Court's earlier orders in Writ Petition Nos.11405 and 11929 of 2011 dated 14.02.2023, with no order as to costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the orders of the Employees' Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi dated 11.10.2010 in ATA No.160(1) of 2006, the underlying orders dated 23.12.2005 and 17.01.2006, and the consequential recovery notice dated 10.01.2011 issued by the 1st respondent are illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed.

Court's answer

The subject matter of this writ petition is squarely covered by this Court's orders in Writ Petition Nos.11405 and 11929 of 2011 dated 14.02.2023, wherein this Court, after an elaborate discussion, dismissed the writ petitions filed by APEPDCL.

Ratio / Principle

Following the said orders in Writ Petition Nos.11405 and 11929 of 2011 dated 14.02.2023, and for the reasons mentioned therein, this writ petition is dismissed.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Dismissed. The Eastern Power Distribution Company of AP Ltd. (APEPDCL) filed Writ Petition No.2287 of 2011 before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati (K. Sreenivasa Reddy, J.) seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the orders of the Employees' Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi dated 11.10.2010 in ATA No.160(1) of 2006, the order No.AP / VP / PD.Cell / CC.56 / 14B / AP / 45057 / 2005 / 450 dated 23.12.2005 as modified by order dated 17.01.2006, and the consequential Notice in Ref.AP / SRO / VSP / Recovery / 45057 / 2011 / 296 dated 10.01.2011 issued by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner / Recovery Officer, as illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction. At hearing, counsel for the respondents submitted, and counsel for APEPDCL acceded, that the subject matter was squarely covered by this Court's orders dated 14.02.2023 in Writ Petition Nos.11405 and 11929 of 2011, wherein APEPDCL's parallel writ petitions had been dismissed after elaborate discussion. Following those orders and for the reasons stated therein, this petition was likewise dismissed, with no order as to costs; pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand closed.

APHC010479322011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3327] (Special Original Jurisdiction)

WEDNESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY

WRIT PETITION NO.2287 OF 2011

Between:

The Eastern Power Distribution Company of AP Ltd., rep. by its Divisional Electrical Engineer. ...PETITIONER

AND

The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner / Recovery Officer and another

...RESPONDENTS

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1.V V SATISH (SC for APEPDCL)

Counsel for the Respondents:

1.ARRABOLU SAI NAVEEN

The Court made the following ORDER:

The present Writ Petition has been filed seeking the following relief.

“…….to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari and call for the records relating to and connected with orders of the Employees’ Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, dated 11.10.2010 passed in ATA No.160(1) of 2006 and Order No.AP / VP / PD.Cell / CC.56 / 14B / AP / 45057 / 2005 / 450, dated 23.12.2005, which was modified in order No.AP / VP / PD.Cell

SRK, J W.P.No.2287 of 2011

2

/ 14B / 45057 / 2006, dated 17.01.2006, and consequential Notice in Ref.AP / SRO / VSP / Recovery / 45057 / 2011 / 296, dated 10.01.2011, issued by the 1^st respondent as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and quash or set aside the same with all consequential benefits.”

Today, when the matter came up for hearing, it is submitted by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, and acceded to, by the learned counsel for the petitioner - APEPDCL, that the subject matter of this Writ Petition is squarely covered by the orders passed by this Court in Writ Petition Nos.11405 and 11929 of 2011, dated 14.02.2023, wherein this Court, after an elaborate discussion, dismissed the Writ Petitions filed by APEPDCL.

Hence, following the said orders passed by this Court in Writ Petition Nos.11405 and 11929 of 2011, dated 14.02.2023 and for the reasons mentioned therein, this Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

________________________ K. SREENIVASA REDDY, J.

Date:04.02.2026

Note :

Office to attach copies of orders in WP Nos.11405 and 11929 of 2011, dated 14.02.2023, to this order. (B/O) Nsr

SRK, J W.P.No.2287 of 2011

3

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SREENIVASA REDDY

Writ Petition No.2287 of 2011

Date:04.02.2026

Nsr